How do domestic violence courts work? A test of the impact of court policies on recidivism

Domestic violence courts typically handle a jurisdiction's domestic violence cases on a separate calendar, presided over by a specially assigned and trained. They arose in response to a number of legal and social developments, in particular, as part of a broader trend towards "problem-solving justice". Problem-solving justice can trace its theoretical roots to innovations in policing, which attempted to replace traditional law enforcement's focus on responding to individual offenses with a focus on addressing patterns of crime and community engagement.;Under the rubric of therapeutic jurisprudence, problem-solving courts emerged in the 1990s. This model posits that legal rules and procedures can be used to improve psychosocial outcomes. However, therapeutic jurisprudence is not the only theoretical foundation for problem solving courts. Deterrence theory posits that receipt or threat of a punishment for an infraction will reduce the likelihood that the infraction will be repeated.;Using the theoretical lenses of therapeutic jurisprudence and deterrence, I conceptualize the key elements of those theories and test whether policies and procedures adopted by these courts are associated with better outcomes than others. Given the unprecedented number of sites, coupled with the application of sophisticated multi-level modeling techniques, this dissertation asks the fundamental question of how domestic violence courts work.;The findings indicate that recidivism reductions are enhanced under some conditions. Substantially advancing the state our knowledge, these analyses point to a greater focus on therapeutic jurisprudence mechanisms, as primary candidates for policy factors that may lead some make domestic violence courts to reduce recidivism more than others. In turn, there are a number of therapeutic jurisprudence and deterrence policies that lead domestic violence courts to increase recidivism as well. This indicates the effectiveness of policies that focus on shared communication, training of outside stakeholders, and accountability mechanisms that are designed and implemented to increase re-arrest when there are reports of assault. The results seem to point to a theoretical model that needs to be tested more to find policies that can be most beneficial to domestic violence offenders and victims of these crimes.